Major Archetypes and the Process of Individuation

(a quick pencil sketch)

by Eric Pettifor

Following the lead of the master I'll take a somewhat circuitous
route to the concept of individuation. First we'll need some
background concepts. The critical ones as I see them are the
unconscious and archetypes.

The Unconscious

There are two types of unconscious, the personal unconscious
and the
collective. The personal unconscious is pretty much self
defining and doesn't need to be perceived as mysterious or
supernatural
(though it is occult in the truest sense of the word - 'hidden').
The personal unconscious contains all the stuff that simply isn't
conscious. It contains stuff that can be made conscious by simple
act of will, stuff that requires some digging, as well as stuff
that may never be recalled to consciousness ever again. It is
made up of the things you've experienced every day of your life.
I'm not sure if it is strictly true that nothing is ever really
and truly lost, totally forgotten, but it seems that the psyche
is very reluctant to let much go in the event that it might come
in handy someday. The psyche is a pack rat, the unconscious full
of its stuff.

The personal unconscious is also a dumping ground for things we aren't
comfortable with and which we'd really rather not have in consciousness
very often. Repressed memories are a hot issue at the moment,
but even without total all out suppression of memory, we are adept
at not thinking about things we'd rather not think about.

Another interesting aspect of the personal unconscious is that recall
can be influenced by context. For example, being slow to recognise
a person on the street who you know very well from school or work
or wherever. There is no sharp dividing line between conscious
and unconscious mind.

The collective unconscious likewise is pretty much self defining.
While you participate in it, it isn't your exclusive property,
we all share in it. It belongs to the species. When Jung had
his official doctor hat on and was defining things ex cathedra
,
the collective unconscious was something passed on genetically.
It was like an edition of a book of which we each had our own
copy. However, in more off the record materials such as letters,
Jung seemed to possess a more spiritual understanding of something
which we are all tapped into somehow, an understanding which would
not have sold in medical circles then and doesn't sell in any
academically oriented circles now, though Jung has become very
popular with the general reading public who seem to enjoy very
much those ideas of Jung's which are farthest out on a limb.

In any event, it was a theory which took courage to advance, but
Jung felt it necessary to do so, since he was noticing a strong
degree of correspondence between dreams of patients, both private
and institutionalised, and mythological motifs. In alchemy he
found not only parallels in terms of content, but process as well.
What he was seeing he felt to be a psychic fact, and the only
acceptable explanation for the persistence of these patterns down
through millenniums was biological inheritance.

Archetypes

Archetypes are essentially quasi autonomous functions which give
rise to specific motifs, as common in all mythology as in any
individual's life. They are often discussed in terms of
personifications
which appear in dreams, but they can also be seen in themes of
stories, mythological or lived. They are very potent as patterns
of action. Another reason I prefer to consider them functionally
is that they perform discrete functions as will be seen below.
They are more than just different flavours of the same thing.

Another advantage of starting with a rather broader definition
to avoid a common confusion of archetype with personified image.
While the Self may give rise to an image of Jesus Christ for
example, it is also the archetype behind the most abstract of
mandalas. I also wished to start this way because it's especially
difficult in the case of the Anima/Animus who seem to be especially
prone to personification, given the emphasis on gender.

The Big Five

The Big Five are the Persona, the Ego, the Shadow,
the
Anima/Animus, and the Self. Each has a specific role or
quality which is why I prefer to think of them as functions.

The Persona

The Persona is that which we present to the outside world. It
isn't really our selves, though there is a danger we can identify
too much with it and believe it to be so. It is a mask. It's
not a bad thing to have, in fact it's necessary for getting along
with others. Jung seems to talk about it in the singular, but
I suspect that a well adjusted person has several masks and is
adept at juggling them and knowing which one is appropriate when
and just how opaque it needs to be. In any event, singular or
plural, it's a fact of life. Ask a doctor what he does and he
won't say, "I do medicine", he's unlikely even to say,
"I practice medicine". What you'll likely hear is
"I'm a doctor". Occupation isn't the only shelf where
masks are pulled from. Religion, sexual orientation, politics,
the social sciences....

The Ego

The ego is the centre of consciousness. It is identity. It is
'I'. But it is not the totality of the psyche. Being the king
of consciousness amounts to dominion over a small but important
land surrounded by a wide world of terra incognita. The more
aware the King is of lands beyond his domain the more secure he
will be on his throne, but he must not be tempted to open the
borders to it all. In Jungian theory the unconscious is far too
vast to ever be made fully conscious, poking about in it is not
without danger, yet ignoring it is also a mistake since it leads
to a brittle fixedness which at best impedes growth, at worst
can break when under the pressure of the 'threat' of change.

The Shadow

I was a couple of sentences in on Anima/Animus, before I noticed
that I had forgotten the Shadow. That is the nature of this
archetype, it is the receptacle for all of that which we have for
one reason or another disowned. There seems to be a movement on to
'redeem' the Shadow, as evidenced by such books as Your Golden
Shadow,
but in truth there's a great deal that's very, very
unpleasant here, since we have good reason for wanting to disown
our darker natures. The avenue for an attempted redemption of the Shadow
lies in the belief that everything disowned winds up here.
A person who grew up in a family where level headedness prevailed
and such things as art making were not given much value may
discover some artistic aptitude hiding out in their shadow. There are
treasures here, but they are buried in stinking muck.

The Anima/Animus

The Anima is the female soul image of a man, the Animus the male
soul image of a woman. That is the most simple definition, and
one which many struggle with, since Jung seems quite absolute
in defining a person's soul image as gender opposite.

"Soul image" sounds very pretty, but the Anima/Animus is not
without a negative pole as well. Jung's anima whispered to him that what
he was doing was "art". He rejected this and pushed ahead as
a 'scientist' which was much better in a society which regards science as
'serious' and art as less so.

If one is on good terms with one's Anima/Animus he/she can prove a
valuable messenger between the unconscious and the conscious, a connecting
link - a veritable Hermes.

The Self

The Self is simply the centre and the totality of the entire
psyche. It is the archetype which contains all the other archetypes and
around which they orbit. It's something of a paradox, and
extremely difficult for the conscious ego to accept.

Archetypes and the Individuation Process

According to Jung, one must get in touch with the Shadow and Anima/Animus
before one can truly get in touch with the Self. The order is sequential,
and as tempting as it may be to try and skip the Shadow or deal only
superficially with it, it is here that we begin.

Jung referred to this initial step as "the First Act of Courage". And
the first thing that is necessary in coming to terms with one's own shadow
is simply to acknowledge that it exists. It sounds obvious, but there are
those for whom the thought of actually having a darker side to their
nature
is extremely uncomfortable. Yet this is one of the primary reasons for
undertaking the 'Shadow work' in the first place, since that which we have
yet disavow in ourselves will be projected outwards.

One of the clues to projection of shadow content is the degree of negative
emotion aroused in us by something in the outside world - often other
people. It can be something they do, or even just the way they look.
Projection is accompanied by emotion. Jung distinguished between
'feeling' (a function which evaluates) and 'emotion' (a physiological
affect). If there is no projection of something which is at the root
personal, it is possible to evaluate something (or someone) external
as being 'bad', without being greatly upset, experiencing, at most,
a sense of regret or pity. If the emotion is stronger than that,
then we may want to ask ourselves what of ourselves we see in what is
making us feel that way. That said, it is important to note that not
all projection is negative, that at some level it may all be projection
given our subjective perspectives, and that there is a place in the
world for righteous anger which motivates social action for change.

One of the advantages of withdrawing one's shadow projections and owning
our own 'stuff' is that the external world may brighten up a little for
ourselves and those around us, since we won't be projecting so much of
a negative nature outwards and saying, 'That's just how the world is,
life's a bitch and then you die.'

There is also truth in the 'Golden Shadow' observation that there are
things of value which we have disowned, both aptitudes and qualities,
in the Shadow. The person who blushes, and qualifies, and resists, and
is generally tremendously uncomfortable when asked to sing may have a
part of them which wants nothing more than to belt out a round or two of
something raucous, commanding the admiration of those around. Thus the
popularity of having a few in a Karoke bar. Also, without going into
great detail, life energy (libido) is locked up in the Shadow, energy
we could all probably use more of.

The downside to the shadow work is that it involves confronting parts
of ourselves which are located in the Shadow precisely because they
are frightening or shameful. Jungian analysts advise that this work
be done only under the supervision of a Jungian analyst, ignoring the
fact that this eliminates a large class of people who cannot afford the
services of such a professional. Another book (ref?) suggests that at
very least one should do the work with the help of a very close friend
whom one trusts in order to have a reference in the external world, an
anchor and safe haven and source of reinforcement when dark realizations
seem to be all out global truths of complete personal unworthiness.
It isn't a journey to be undertaken lightly.

At some vaguely defined point evolving naturally out of the process
(?!) it becomes possible to begin the work of getting in touch with
the Anima/Animus. There is less written on this stage than that of
the Shadow, which is as one would expect, given that fewer have made it
this far.